Octane boosters - Do they hurt anything?

I have been riding my motorcycle daily for the last two weeks since I don't have to bring the kids to school. It has been quite warm down here, mid to upper 90's, and I have been noticing slight pinging from the engine. I only use 89 ethanol free on this engine as it tends to sit quite a bit and I never know when the next fill-up is. 

I'd like to try an octane booster but I am not sure if they would hurt any of the emission components, catalytic/O2 sensor. Any ideas?

Any advise on what brand to buy or what to avoid?

Might hurt your wallet. 

See if this Fuel Tips helps. 

The TL;DR that I have learned from Zachary: Read the SDS to see exactly what's in the bottle. That sheet will reveal a lot. 

Is that "octane booster" just 90% fuel? If so, then the math probably says that your octane isn't going to go up by much. 

In reply to David S. Wallens :

Thanks for that thread! I ordered some of that Torco, let's see how it does. 

Its expensive but gas is cheap now and I dont use the bike that much. 

Id like to know what bike this is. And why is it pinging?  It may not be an octane issue, it may be an actual issue. 

Is there a reason you wouldn't just buy premium fuel?

I've had good luck with EFS Combust in these situations. It's primarily a blend of different types of alcohol but it does a good job stopping detonation. Also doesn't seem to gum up carbs like E15 does.

What bike, and what fuel does the factory recommend?

To echo everyone else, basically every modern bike requires 91 minimum because of the high compression.

Tolune is already an ingredient in many gasoline blends - I've used this in a pinch.

80's F1 turbo engines ran on something like 80% toluene. They called it rocket fuel. Pictures of teams fueling the car had them wearing a haz-mat style fire suit, with mask and googles. The stuff was probably like the top fuel cars nitromethane, burns your eyes and nose.  Boost was around 55 psi in race trim and more for qualifying. 

Sorry, missed a few responses. Here are answers to some of the questions:

- 2017 BMW R nine T
- It will do it regardless of whether I use 93  or 89. 
- I started putting 89 due to the fact that the bike might sit for 6 months, one of the reasons I want to use an octane booster is to bring it up a couple of points.
- Its the only ethanol free gas I can find locally, I know its not the best option. 
- The manual states, 91 is preferred but 89 can be used at the expense of performance. 

The pinging is only on decel when blipping the throttle, it will never do it when lugging, under the load or at WOT.

Not sure if its a byproduct of a big unbalanced opposed twin piston engine or what, but its a well know issue with these motors. 

Also the bike has anti-knock, maybe that's why it is only a split second and on decel only?

It also has twin plugs and its detuned to meet emissions, possibly why it can run lower grade fuel. 87 AKI is OK as per the manual:

It's probably not "De-tuned to meet emissions" It's probably more like "Tuned lean to meet emissions".

My 2013 Moto Guzzi Stelvio (big bore twin as well) ran like garbage with the factory fueling. The pretty much universal fix for anything with the 5am ECU (Ducati, Aprilia, Guzzi) is to upload a new fuel map.

I'd bet your factory, emissions compliant tune is garbage and it needs to be fattened up.

Don't use one of those ECU foolers (resistor in the temp sensor) that they sell online, you'll bugger your engine.

The new Euro emissions standards have been really hard on big bore, air cooled engines. Guzzi's 8v twin went away, Royal Enfield is dropping their 500 single next year and a few of the big Japanese thumpers are going away.

As for octane boosters, they raise it a point, as in 0.1. So your tank of 89 would now be 89.1. Don't waste your money.

In reply to ShawnG :

You are probably right on the tuned on the lean side. 

I am glad you mentioned the ECU foolers as I was going to pick one of those. 

The good part of this is that I know exactly how to replicate it, and thus I avoid that as much as possible. It sometimes still escapes me and it happens. 

It might be time to trade it in for a CBR1000-RR SP  ... I rode my 2000 Yamaha R1 the other day and that thing is sooo much smoother and no mention of how much faster lol. 

In reply to ShawnG :

It would be interesting to see the actual data how it runs.  As I've found that the best emissions also mean the engine runs the best once you get out of the catalyst light off timing (which is now less than 30 seconds).  

And my goal has always been the best of the best emissions with the driver not knowing a single thing that it's happening.

(which is to say, they are doing it wrong....)

In reply to alfadriver (Forum Supporter) :

I've always operated on the idea that the most efficiently run engine should also run the cleanest but that may not be what the Euro emissions test is looking for. I believe the engines are tuned only to pass the test, not to be optimally efficient.

I can only speak for the tune in the 'Guzzi 8v engine.

There were two issues that were the problem, one was a snatchy throttle just off of idle and the second was a surging between 3500 to 4000 rpm.

There are two guys that I know of who write the best maps for these engines, one guy is in Germany (I'm running his map) and another in Australia. The fix in both of their maps is to richen up the fuel in the lower rpm ranges and to turn off the O2 sensor and run the engine strictly on throttle position and manifold pressure. They both also add more timing.

The guy from Germany mentioned that the factory tune was pretty out of whack from one cylinder to the other as well. It's a flying twin so both cylinders see the same amount of cooling air so both should be fueled pretty closely but apparently these were way off.

The surging at rpm is fixed by shutting off the O2 sensors (which I did in software long before I started running the improved map) because the ECU transitions in or out of (can't remember off the top of my head) using the O2 sensor feedback right around 4000 rpm.

The bike is much more ridable now, no more snatchy throttle and no more surge. More power but more fuel consumption. I'll gladly take the mileage hit to improve the way the engine runs.

For what it's worth, the factory has also released upgraded maps for these bikes which do make some improvements but nothing as good as the aftermarket maps. Probably because the factory has to remain emissions compliant.

As for the ECU foolers, I've never dealt with them personally. Guzzitech swears by them but they like Power Commanders too and most guys who use Power Commanders end up taking them off. Pete Roper, the Aussie guru of all things 'Guzzi has shared the aftermath of a few engines prematurely worn thanks to overfueling from these add-on products.

The reason the new Euro standards are killing big bore, air cooled bikes is because of the uneven cooling affecting oil consumption and increasing emissions. "Guzzi tried to fix this with the oil cooled 8V engines but the latest standards killed them. BMW has been trying the same with added cooling on their engines. Most manufacturers are giving up and building smaller engines or going multi-cylinder.

It's also Moto Guzzi so it could just be plain old incompetence. Generally they're fantastic bikes once you spend some time fixing all the stuff the manufacturer forgot.

Motorcycles have left the factory with horrible tuning since the dawn of motorcycling. There's a whole industry built around making them run properly once they get into the owners hands.

Heck the 80's CB900s could pick up nearly 10hp just by re-jetting them.

That's all I know about the situation. I know you understand a lot more about this sort of thing than I do and there's a lot more going on with emissions requirements than I understand.

Thanks for the more detailed explanation.  In terms of the actual amount of rich vs lean- I would be very interested in how much it is one way or the other, and what O2 sensor it's using.

What year are we talking about here?  If it were post 2010, WB sensors were universally used for cars, so they were cheap and very effective.  And catalysts have been used for the better part of 50 years, too.  So it's not as if they had to run purely off of the engine emissions.  But based on some of your descriptions of the changes, they are running more off of the engine emissions than catalyzed emissions... Which is odd.

Then again, I know that the motorcyle industry have been like hte car industry in the 70s in terms of dragging their feet and not wanting to be forced to not pollute.  So there's a remote possibility that they intentionally make it run like crap so that they can blame the emissions standards for the bikes being crap.  Dunno.

The "frustration" for me is that I know how relatively easy it is to be very clean.

I believe they're narrow band sensors, it's a 2013.

They're running off of engine emissions, the cat is downstream in the muffler.

As somebody who rides and then has to store a bike for 7 months a year, invest in a siphon. When you're done riding and the bike is going to sit, pull out the fuel and save it for the mower. 
 

All of our fuel here is ethanol free at all pumps but the highest octane is 90. If I had access to 93 e10 I'd run it and then just store it dry or run some stabil through the last tank of fuel.

i store my 240z for 12 months at a time and even with ethanol free fuel and stabil, it's super dead when I start it again. I'm just going to move to fogging and dry storage.